Author summary
0%7 analyzed articles/videos2,896 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Hookstead results contain 50 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 20.7% saturation with 1,780 hits. Analysis detected 19,418 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,589 analyzed words across 7 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.5% and a BS Rank of 80% (1,262 of 6,134 authors). This David Hookstead is worse (more manipulative) than 79.40% of the peer group.
David Hookstead
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Megan Fan Munce1%
1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
80%David Hookstead (selected)5%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 8,589
Article count: 7
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

79% percentile
025507510079.4% percentile
4.5% BS Score7 analyzed articles8.6K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 20.7%20.7%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 17.1%17.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 12.7%12.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 11.4%11.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 13.3%13.3%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Author 6.5%6.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 6.2%6.2%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Author 8.0%8.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 12.9%12.9%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Author 5.7%5.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Framing Effect: Author 17.1%, sitewide 26.9%Biased Writer Voice: Author 20.7%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Author 11.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 17.8%, sitewide 15.9%In-Group Bias: Author 13.3%, sitewide 6.9%Hasty Generalization: Author 12.9%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence Bias: Author 12.7%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to Authority: Author 6.2%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Author 10.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 9.6%, sitewide 6.0%Confirmation Bias: Author 9.2%, sitewide 7.5%Availability Heuristic: Author 5.5%, sitewide 9.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 8.0%, sitewide 3.1%Anecdotal: Author 7.1%, sitewide 5.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 6.5%, sitewide 0.5%Self-Serving Bias: Author 6.1%, sitewide 3.7%Ad Hominem: Author 6.0%, sitewide 2.2%Bandwagon: Author 5.9%, sitewide 2.2%Straw Man: Author 5.7%, sitewide 0.9%Anchoring Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate